It’s the only logical conclusion. Any other would result in inconsistencies and uneven application. One cannot continually evaluate and determine worthiness (as defined by you) of all users.

Moreover this program began under the Obama admin. So the decision itself is internally inconsistent.

> One cannot continually evaluate and determine worthiness (as defined by you) of all users.

Why not? Or even, occasionally evaluate and determine worthiness?

How can you go into the private thinking of people? Are we going to surveil them? It’s impractical.

You could rely on investigative reporting done by others. You won't catch everything, but you'll catch some stuff—which is better than none.

Why does that make it internally inconsistent? It sounds like you're advocating for blind political loyalty.